Re: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] 120 contributions to 16e for Session#33
I think that it should be, and thought that it had been, the business of the
Security Ad-Hoc to harmonize the security related contributions to 16e.
These are now posted in the 16e upload directory, soon to be moved to the
contributions directory. I think that if they are posted as 16e
contributions for Session #33, you can logically extend that they are
'formally received by the 802.16e Security Adhoc'. Obviously, the Security
Ad-Hoc was unable to achieve consensus prior to the submission deadline as
is evidenced by the fact that not a single security related contribution
carries the moniker of Security Ad-Hoc Consensus Contribution. The Security
Ad-Hoc should work to minimize the number of divergent contributions in the
topic area through achieving harmonized contributions. It would have been
preferable to have done that prior to the submission deadline. Failing
that, there are proposed security contributions in the upload directory
seeking harmonization. The Security Ad-Hoc has not achieved its goal yet.
Time remains to harmonize the contributions. That is the only precedent the
Working Group need concern itself over.
Thanks,
Phil
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Mandin" <jmandin@STREETWAVES-NETWORKS.COM>
To: <STDS-802-16-MOBILE@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG>
Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 9:15 AM
Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] 120 contributions to 16e for Session#33
> JH's request is fine with me. We will only harmonize the contributions
> that were formally received by the 802.16e Security Adhoc, however.
>
> To do otherwise would set a terrible precedent - both in terms of
> Working Group procedure and in terms of giving proper consideration to
> what we are actually incorporating.
>
> - Jeff Mandin
> Security Adhoc Chair
>
> JUNHYUK SONG wrote:
>
> >MessageI think everyone in the group can make a suggestion.
> >DJ simply suggests that Security Adhoc group meet early in the week, so
we can reconcile various contributions that didn't have a chance to be
harmonized.
> >
> >
> >
> >- JH SONG
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Itzik Kitroser
> > To: STDS-802-16-MOBILE@listserv.ieee.org
> > Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 5:04 PM
> > Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] 120 contributions to 16e for
Session#33
> >
> >
> > DJ,
> >
> >
> >
> > Small query, since I would have expected to see such summary from Jeff,
as the ad hoc chair, rather than you.
> >
> > Was the harmonization an open process through the reflector or a
private harmonization between companies?
> >
> > I think that it is important, since the output of the security ad hoc
must reflect a consensus (or majority decision) in which everybody had the
chance to provide an opinion.
> >
> > If the harmonization was not reached through the ad hoc but rather as a
private (and legitimate) agreement between companies (for example in a
private interim meeting) you should reflect it as such (although than I
really don't understand why we had ad hoc at all).
> >
> >
> >
> > Itzik.
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-stds-802-16-mobile@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
[mailto:owner-stds-802-16-mobile@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of Johnston,
Dj
> > Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 6:53 AM
> > To: STDS-802-16-MOBILE@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> > Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] 120 contributions to 16e for
Session#33
> >
> >
> >
> > A number of the contributions into the security adhoc have been
pre-harmonized. I suggest that the security adhoc meet sufficiently early in
the week so we can sift the inputs and if we can agree, approve a batch of
submissions as the output of the adhoc. This should streamline the security
work.
> >
> >
> >
> > I am preparing summary slides showing how the various security
proposals interrelate. It seems that these might fulfil the purpose that
Phil is proposing.
> >
> >
> >
> > DJ
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-stds-802-16-mobile@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
[mailto:owner-stds-802-16-mobile@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG] On Behalf Of Kiernan,
Brian G.
> > Sent: Saturday, June 26, 2004 1:10 PM
> > To: STDS-802-16-MOBILE@LISTSERV.IEEE.ORG
> > Subject: Re: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] 120 contributions to 16e for
Session#33
> >
> > Phil's proposal makes eminent sense to me. I agree, there is no way
we will get through 120 contributions in Portland without giving each one
very short shrift. I strongly urge consolidation, where possible.
> >
> >
> >
> > Brian
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Phillip Barber [mailto:pbarber@BROADBANDMOBILETECH.COM]
> > Sent: Saturday, June 26, 2004 03:46 PM
> > To: STDS-802-16-MOBILE@listserv.ieee.org
> > Subject: [STDS-802-16-MOBILE] 120 contributions to 16e for
Session#33
> >
> > Something like 120 contributions have been uploaded to 16e for
consideration at Sessions#33. We have only through July 2nd to provide
reply commentary on these contributions, plus all other comments to the D3
draft. I think we need to organize immediately, or there is no way that we
are going to get this done and be ready to make it through this volume of
contributions at Portland.
> >
> >
> >
> > The nightmare scenario is having to wade through all of these
individual contribution presentations, discussion, potential modification,
at the meeting itself. Based on this volume, we will have no choice but to
bull our way through, omit discussion and potential modification, and just
vote. Because of the volume of material it is likely that members will not
have adequately reviewed all material to make an informed vote at that time
without discussion, which will not be possible. So good contributions will
be voted down because of the volume of work.
> >
> >
> >
> > In order to avoid that outcome, I think we need to organize
material into common topicality that volunteers can address both through the
list and in reply commentary. This will give contributors the benefit of
some focused evaluation and provide members relief from having to review all
contributions. To facilitate establishing topical focus, I would encourage
contributors to provide a one or two paragraph overview/summary of their
contribution to the list.
> >
> >
> >
> > Any thoughts on this proposal?
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Phillip Barber
> > President
> > Broadband Mobile Technologies, Inc.
> > 972-365-6314 direct (US)
> > +44 (0) 7909 794959 mobile (UK)
> > +85 (2) 9247 5398 mobile (HK)
> > 925-396-0269 fax
> >
> >
> >
> >
>